896 FLIGHT International, 22 June 1972
AIR TRANSPORT
Viasa's wide bodies
PROBABLY the most curiously liveried Boeing 747 flying
today is that which lives a schizophrenic existence plying
back and forth across the mid-Atlantic for two masters—
KLM and Viasa of Venezuela. Viasa's lease of the 747—
it has a full KLM colour scheme on one side and an equally
complete Viasa decor on the other—marked a tremendous
step forward for the Latin American carrier.
When it launched a weekly Caracas-Madrid-Paris round-
trip service with the jumbo (for which it has three trained
flight-deck crews) in April it was the first South American
airline to begin wide-body jet services. It has backed up
its faith in the future of widebody jets with an order for
two DC-10-30s—the first for any widebody type from a
Latin American airline.
Viasa puts its first DC-10 into service in April 1974; the
second will follow 12 months later. They have been ordered
through KLM and are to the same technical specification
as those ordered by the Dutch carrier to facilitate equip
ment interchange and engineering commonality.
The links between the two airlines were forged when
Viasa was born in 1961, and they have been maintained
ever since. KLM performs all major engineering work for
Viasa, trains its pilots and acts as its general sales agents
throughout Europe and elsewhere. The Viasa lease of the
747 is just the latest episode in this type of co-operation
between the two carriers.
From next year Viasa will get increased use of the 747
when it adds another service from Caracas, this time to
Rome via Madrid. When the DC-lOs come into service
Clear for take-off?
A RECENT COLLISION between a 707 and a Convair 440 on the runway at Barbados once again highlights the elements of a possible disaster (this incident fortunately
did not reach that stage). The 707 was taking off and
struck the 440, damaging the fin and rudder of the other
aircraft and itself suffering some fuselage damage.
The 707 pilot elected to continue a long over-water
flight; although there seemed to have been no in-flight
warning symptoms or indications to suggest the possibility
of the aircraft being seriously affected, his decision was
nonetheless a weighty one. With a less scrupulous airline
in circumstances of this sort, and in a fiercely competitive
market, one can see the possibility of commercial pressures
affecting a pilot's decision.
Recently another near-catastrophe occurred at Miami
International Airport, when a 707 taking off just missed
colliding with an aircraft being towed on the take-off
runway. The tractor driver had been expected to remain
clear by the ground controller, but did not do so, and the
707 cleared the other aircraft by a few feet. Many will
also know of the collision that happened at Mascot Airport,
Sydney, last year, when a DC-8 was hit by a 727 taking off.
This is enough evidence to show that we have a special
problem. There have been many other cases of conflict
and collision in past years. Some of these are associated,
as at Barbados, with the use of a single runway; others
are possible where two active runways intersect, for
instance at Dorval, Montreal. There are many airports
which have poor layouts, and to achieve any sort of
movement rate certain devices are resorted to which have
their special risk factors.
These factors include the restriction of landing distance
usable in order to avoid approaching the other runway;
examples of this one are Honolulu and Miami. The lack
of taxiways for large aircraft like the 747 has caused the
current increase in back-tracking and runway occupancy,
but there are many airports that still have no proper taxi-
way system, and where 180° turns have to be made on the
runway before take-off or after landing. In some places
they too will fly mid-Atlantic routes to major points on
Viasa's eight-city European network as well as flying
mainstream services to the USA. As an interim boost to
capacity Viasa has bought two DC-8-33s from KLM, having
recently won new routes to Washington and Toronto. This
additional pair of DC-8s will be delivered by KLM in
September and April and join two -63s and two -50s, plus
one -55F used by the Viasa cargo subsidiary Transcarga.
In addition Viasa leases a DC-9-10 from the domestic air
line Avensa for Caribbean-area services. Avensa is a
45 per cent stockholder in Viasa, the other 55 per cent
being held by the Government, By mutual agreement the
US and Venezuelan Governments have agreed that there
will be no widebody jet services between the two countries
until 1974.
In the last financial year Viasa carried 287,000 passen
gers (14 • 1 per cent up on the year before) and made a net
profit of close on £650,000. It has been profitable for all
11 years of its existence and this year expects carryings
of more than 300,000 passengers, although profits are
expected to be down because of devaluation of the US
dollar and European currencies, lower fares and rising
labour costs. Key points served in Europe are Madrid,
Paris, Rome and Lisbon. London, which has a once-weekly
DC-8-63 service (via Madrid and continuing on to Amster
dam) is reckoned to be a difficult market because there is
little business travel to Venezuela and tourist traffic from
the UK is virtually non-existent.
One estimate is that 85 per cent of all Viasa's mid-
Atlantic traffic—its highest revenue-yielding routes—
originates in South America. The problem with which the
airline is now grappling is to even out the flow, and it is
hoped that Venezuela's new drive for European tourists
will be a significant factor in boosting westbound loads.
Pilot's point of view
the tower is not able to see the manoeuvring area and at
night or in bad visibility we are even more at risk. Humped
runways where the far end is hidden are not uncommon.
We will continue to have collisions unless there is
improved vigilance by pilots and controllers. The use of
some electronic device to warn of runway obstruction is
not impracticable where visual problems exist; the bigger
airports have surface movement radar, but the smaller
places could surely have something simpler.
I would like to leave the technical solution and deal
with the human side of the problem. Basic airmanship
should always call for a careful inspection of the runway
befone take-off or landing. This will not necessarily pick up
small items like metal hooks or tarmac lumps, but should
avoid aircraft running into other aircraft or tractors. Most
aircraft have the capability of overshooting from the land
ing flare with complete safety, but the abandoned take-off
has its own special risks compounded by stopping perform
ance, overheated brakes and steering capability plus the
possibility of leaving the paved surface.
At night, when most of the accidents occur, it is hard to
pick out the navigation lights of a towed aircraft. The
rotating red anti-collision light of an aircraft under its
own power—and the white strobe lights of the alternative
system—can and should be seen. In rain, however, there
is much distortion of vision. There is still far too much
unnecessary mental pressure on the crew of an aircraft
about to take off caused by the last-minute reading-through
of checklist items and handling of radio calls that could
easily wait until airborne.
The distraction factor that assails crews during this
phase of departure could be lessened, although careful
airmanship should prevent a crew from being hurried into
an ill-considered decision. Much of the problem is attribu
table to a growth of complacency at all levels of civil
aviation. We must once again all realise that the factors
of life and death still depend for their balance upon the
same care that was installed into us during our initial
training. Safety cannot be left to someone else, MAINLINER